Average block size was 0.951 MB - page 5.

isvicre

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: isen on June 19, 2016, 09:03:49 AM

It's getting very annoying,2 days ago i sent a payment of 0.14 btc and it took about 3 hours to be confirmed.
This must be change asap otherwise it will hurt btc

Adjust your fee. Ive made payments all week with a. 0002 fee and had no issues with waiting hours.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Lauda on June 19, 2016, 09:06:20 AM

Quote from: isen on June 19, 2016, 09:03:49 AM

It's getting very annoying,2 days ago i sent a payment of 0.14 btc and it took about 3 hours to be confirmed.
This must be change asap otherwise it will hurt btc

No. Bitcoin is working as intended. Don't blame Bitcoin if: 1) You're cheap. 2) You don't know how to use it properly. I have yet to find someone that I know (which are mostly experienced members) that had "problems with this". Besides, Segwit is getting ready to be merged. The "awaited" capacity 'boost' will come with it.

Yes. Bitcoin is working as intended by Core. Don't blame Bitcoin if:
1) You can't work out the correct Core dynamic fee. (you will also need to see the future to be sure )
2) You didn't know paying higher and higher fees is in the Core roadmap. ...vvv

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4270

Merit: 4534

ha ha ha,, told you lauda would chime in

and WTF he is pretending there is no mempool now..

wait i got to quote him saying that for posterity sake

Quote from: Lauda on June 19, 2016, 09:01:18 AM

There is no such thing as "the mempool"

seriously he really needs to learn some bitcoin basics

oh this gave me a chuckle

Quote from: Lauda on June 19, 2016, 09:01:18 AM

certainly not with "35k open transactions". This solely depends on the settings that a specific node uses. My node has had 40-50k unconfirmed transactions on average for months, but you could clearly see that the mempool at other places (e.g. blockchain.info) was almost empty at times.

lauda's logic is based on the fact that bitcoin blocks dont need transactions to make a block,
but his false logic is that he will continue to say bitcoin is running fine even if there are no transactions, a couple transactions or thousands.. because he doesnt see, or want to see bitcoin as something useful for people actually transacting..

he cannot accept the fact that people want to make transactions so transactions are important.
im starting to think he is getting jealous of bitcoin and wants some altcoin to steal bitcoins utility and is trying his damned hardest to twist things until his blockstream pals have sidechains live so he can sell people onto the promise of sidechains..

what made me laugh the most is this statement applies to segwit even more..

Quote from: Lauda on June 19, 2016, 09:01:18 AM

Bullshit by people who don't know what they're talking about (again). A block size limit increase is no solution at all. It does not improve scalability, it does not do anything than open an already pressurized valve even further and hope for the best. Regardless of what you set the block size limit at, the very same people will be able to spam it up all again and then we will have the same people complain (again) about unconfirmed transactions because they don't know how to use the fee system properly.

the reasons
1. segwit only overs 1.8x at most.. meaning less scaling than 2mb
2. segwit offers discount on fees.. meaning cheaper to spam

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: isen on June 19, 2016, 09:03:49 AM

It's getting very annoying,2 days ago i sent a payment of 0.14 btc and it took about 3 hours to be confirmed.
This must be change asap otherwise it will hurt btc

No. Bitcoin is working as intended. Don't blame Bitcoin if: 1) You're cheap. 2) You don't know how to use it properly. I have yet to find someone that I know (which are mostly experienced members) that had "problems with this". Besides, Segwit is getting ready to be merged. The "awaited" capacity 'boost' will come with it.

isen

sr. member

Activity: 854

Merit: 250

It's getting very annoying,2 days ago i sent a payment of 0.14 btc and it took about 3 hours to be confirmed.
This must change asap otherwise it will hurt btc

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Real-Duke on June 19, 2016, 07:44:33 AM

Sent a payment of 1,5btc on tuesday that was confirmed today morning after ~5days!
Have forgotten to check the mempool before I sent the coins. With 35k open transactions and a small fee of 0,00002...not my best idea so far Roll Eyes

There is no such thing as "the mempool" and certainly not with "35k open transactions". This solely depends on the settings that a specific node uses. My node has had 40-50k unconfirmed transactions on average for months, but you could clearly see that the mempool at other places (e.g. blockchain.info) was almost empty at times.

Quote from: Batelk on June 19, 2016, 08:50:26 AM

Spam transactions? I sent 2.6 bitcoin a few days ago with 0.001 bitcoin with just 226Byte, it took more than 5 hours to confirm.

Provide TX ID or go away with these stories. Roll Eyes

Quote from: countryfree on June 19, 2016, 07:07:11 AM

I'm expecting the situation to get worse. Unless the block size is increased.

Bullshit by people who don't know what they're talking about (again). A block size limit increase is no solution at all. It does not improve scalability, it does not do anything than open an already pressurized valve even further and hope for the best. Regardless of what you set the block size limit at, the very same people will be able to spam it up all again and then we will have the same people complain (again) about unconfirmed transactions because they don't know how to use the fee system properly.

Quote from: onlinedragon on June 19, 2016, 08:56:36 AM

Wow that is ridiculous you can't count on your money this way. When even a normal bank transaction is faster than a bitcoin transaction. Thought it was meant to be a fast solution to send money to each other.

Bitcoin is faster than anything in the traditional system if you use it properly. If you don't use it properly, you can't blame Bitcoin for slow transactions. Period.

onlinedragon

hero member

Activity: 1036

Merit: 501

Quote from: Real-Duke on June 19, 2016, 07:44:33 AM

Sent a payment of 1,5btc on tuesday that was confirmed today morning after ~5days!
Have forgotten to check the mempool before I sent the coins. With 35k open transactions and a small fee of 0,00002...not my best idea so far Roll Eyes

Wow that is ridiculous you can't count on your money this way. When even a normal bank transaction is faster than a bitcoin transaction. Thought it was meant to be a fast solution to send money to each other.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: countryfree on June 19, 2016, 07:07:11 AM

See what happened on the 15th of June:
https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=30days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

Click on 2 years to clearly see the growth of transactions, and the inevitability of full blocks.

Quote from: franky1 on June 19, 2016, 08:16:05 AM

..the problem its either pay more or wait. there is no mechanism for pay 90% and guarantee confirm in an hour, pay 80% and guarantee in 2 hours. its just pay more or wait.

That is a problem, and just adds to the correct fee confusion. As you say, this is hit and hope.
Even "currently recommended" fees, in a rising market, suffer this problem. (as just seen)
Due to Cores dynamic fees, the only (almost) sure way to get in the next block is to out bid all other current fee payers.

Batelk

full member

Activity: 216

Merit: 100

Quote from: yayayo on June 19, 2016, 08:39:54 AM

A spam transaction with a below average 0.0001 BTC fee confirmed after 4 hours. So what? I think this shows that a healthy fee market is not fully developed, because spam transactions like OP's still receive this kind of premium service.

We need more fee pressure to incentivize optimizations for automated transactions and to drive transaction spam out. Microtransactions do not need the same level of service at a native Bitcoin layer than ordinary transactions. The former are better served by payment channels, that work faster and more efficiently for this use case.

There is no urgency to increase the blocksize at all. Bitcoin is working fine despite the staged drama from bigblock-fanatics.

ya.ya.yo!

Spam transactions? I sent 2.6 bitcoin a few days ago with 0.001 bitcoin with just 226Byte, it took more than 5 hours to confirm.

yayayo

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1024

A spam transaction with a below average 0.0001 BTC fee confirmed after 4 hours. So what? I think this shows that a healthy fee market is not fully developed, because spam transactions like OP's still receive this kind of premium service.

We need more fee pressure to incentivize optimizations for automated transactions and to drive transaction spam out. Microtransactions do not need the same level of service at a native Bitcoin layer than ordinary transactions. The former are better served by payment channels, that work faster and more efficiently for this use case.

There is no urgency to increase the blocksize at all. Bitcoin is working fine despite the staged drama from bigblock-fanatics.

ya.ya.yo!

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4270

Merit: 4534

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2016, 08:09:57 AM

Quote from: Real-Duke on June 19, 2016, 07:44:33 AM

Sent a payment of 1,5btc on tuesday that was confirmed today morning after ~5days!
Have forgotten to check the mempool before I sent the coins. With 35k open transactions and a small fee of 0,00002...not my best idea so far Roll Eyes

Damn that is a long time to confirm, you're obviously clued up though & you realise why, the fee was way too small Grin

I always pay higher than the average fee because I'm always keen to see quick confirmations.

everyone is keen to see quick confirmations. thats the problem its either pay more or wait. there is no mechanism for pay 90% and guarantee confirm in an hour, pay 80% and guarantee in 2 hours. its just pay more or wait.

which is not a "free market" concept but a "open market" concept.

we should not be forcing a fee war especially when its not essential to pools for decades and especially when there is no mechanism to help people have a true choice of priority that actually works

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: Real-Duke on June 19, 2016, 07:44:33 AM

Sent a payment of 1,5btc on tuesday that was confirmed today morning after ~5days!
Have forgotten to check the mempool before I sent the coins. With 35k open transactions and a small fee of 0,00002...not my best idea so far Roll Eyes

Damn that is a long time to confirm, you're obviously clued up though & you realise why, the fee was way too small Grin

I always pay higher than the average fee because I'm always keen to see quick confirmations.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4270

Merit: 4534

lets await the usual blockstream suspects who will pretend that scalability is not a problem and tell people to just pay more.
leading the way to making bitcoin more expensive to use, to further their agenda to create sidechains and move people away from bitcoin.

Real-Duke

legendary

Activity: 3360

Merit: 2146

Top Crypto Casino

Sent a payment of 1,5btc on tuesday that was confirmed today morning after ~5days!
Have forgotten to check the mempool before I sent the coins. With 35k open transactions and a small fee of 0,00002...not my best idea so far Roll Eyes

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: countryfree on June 19, 2016, 07:07:11 AM

See what happened on the 15th of June:

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=30days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

I don't want to scare anyone but if there are some people who think that a block size increase isn't URGENT, they're wrong. We only have a 5% margin to full capacity and the effects are already being felt.

I think most people already aware that block almost full (or it's already full).
As far as i know, there are few good solution to solve this problem

Quote from: countryfree on June 19, 2016, 07:07:11 AM

I made 2 transactions on Thursday, both with a 0.0001 BTC fee. One was 226 bytes and it went smoothly, another was 930 bytes, it took more than 4 hours to confirm. I'm expecting the situation to get worse. Unless the block size is increased.

Most people's default fee is 0.0005BTC/KB, that's why your second transaction took lots of time to get confirmed.

countryfree

legendary

Activity: 3052

Merit: 1047

Your country may be your worst enemy

See what happened on the 15th of June:

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=30days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

I don't want to scare anyone but if there are some people who think that a block size increase isn't URGENT, they're wrong. We only have a 5% margin to full capacity and the effects are already being felt.
I made 2 transactions on Thursday, both with a 0.0001 BTC fee. One was 226 bytes and it went smoothly, another was 930 bytes, it took more than 4 hours to confirm. I'm expecting the situation to get worse. Unless the block size is increased.

Topic: Average block size was 0.951 MB - page 5. (Read 3393 times)